Tag Archives: Sex

Dial 999 and Die…


Christopher Houseman

It’s good to know what Joe Public’s life is worth when duty calls

We can but hope this is an exceptional case; but then facing an imminent danger to one’s life is also pretty exceptional for most people. So the question remains: Are you sure you want to trust the Police to save you? It could be your final answer anyway.

Ed Balls nasty man


David Davis

I’m saving my virginity for this election.

When I was a young boy, we were sometimes being warned, usually by our parents, about people called “nasty men”. We were all of course quite familiar with the history of WW2, as it had just occurred that morning in relative terms, so we wondered if Stalin was the finger-man, or if it was somebody else such as the Gestapo or the SD (as boys, we all were quite familiar with what the SD did and why, for it was only the 1950s). We didn’t think it was German Generals, since we knew all about these by name, and mostly they were “clean” insofar as behaviour on battlefronts was concerned. Even as sx- and seven-year-olds, we accepted a few departures from full Geneva-Convention-Stuff, “in the heat of battle” sort of thing. We even weathered the Cuban Missile Crisis without being “afraid to die”. It was only 1962, sex had not yet been invented, and so therefore we “knew that we were right”, and that “all will turn out for the best, boys!” in the end.

I now know what these “nasty men” were, and one of them is this one here. They were not people that my sad mum called “men who want to play with your wee-wee” ( I have never, ever, ever understood what the attraction of this might be, especially as it now smells most of the time whatever I do to the blasted thing) but actually politicians of the anti-liberal-Political Enemy-Class”.

If Ed Balls wants to come and play with my wee-wee, then everybody has his price, and I have mine. He can fondle my wee-wee, and suck me off (it will do nothing for me as I know this already: the practice of “fellatio”, forced on young men who didn’t see the point of it, by feminist women in the early-70s, appeared to me to be disgusting, un-necessary and totalitarian, since women were already pre-equipped with all the required apparatus anyway and the human mouth was not needed for the process) or do what he wants…but this is the price….. All remaining structures, political, concrete and virtual, that were ever Raised In This Land by the Socialists, and latterly by the GramscoFabiaNazis, will have to come down.

For ever.

And I mean _/ever/_ .

Soclialism must be eliminated, totally. For ever.

If the nasty-man wants to suck my wee-wee, then that is the cost.

Faith schools under attack…again


David Davis

Rather than bludgeoning “Faith Schools” (‘coz they hate them for being an alternative power-centre) to conform to the trumpeting of State-Nazi-Sex pursuits, in the guise of “PSHE”, it might be instructive if we saw something else. Such as, if we were allowed to see a breakdown of teenage pregnancy statistics by type of school. The “40.4 conceptions per 1,000 girls aged 15-17 might, just might, be rather concentrated within that sector of girls that goes to “non-faith” British-State schools.

In fact I suspect it probably is, but would be interested to see the evidence for my prejudice. My prejudice is against miserable humourless GramscoFabians gratifying their lust for coercive-collective-pornography, by forcing children to hear about “how to put on your partner’s condom”, and the like – being correct here.

I do not care if Tiger Woods is sorry for anything or everythhing


Micheal qwinning

Why does it matter to the world, what these men do? Does it matter if the golfer-chappy lives or dies? Not really.

But also, to help us from being assailed by this sort of news-rubbish-stuff too often, I agree with what Celia Walden (who is that?) said earlier today about sportsmen. They ought to be forbidden to marry until age 350 or somethng. And trying to sit their animal passions with what “sponsors” whatever those are want them to seem to be, is just mad and silly, it will end in tears as it has done with Tiger Woods and John Terry and who knows how many more.

And this is really realyl funny, you have to have a laugh, please have a look! It’s sort of a bit related to the guys above.

Girls have clearly moved on


David Davis

Many decades ago, my father – a scientist – described to me as a small boy a kind of injury out of pure scientific interest, caused by a stiletto heel making a self-shaped depressed-skull-fracture. It was like a trepanning-wound only small and D-shaped.The injuree was invariably male, in the 1950s and 1950s.

It was called “somebody-or-other’s syndrome” (I can’t google it sadly) named after the usual obscure central-European-Physician who first described it. Not Kleinfelter’s, nor Münschausen’s, but something like that.

Clearly, today’s new-labour girls, fired up by GramscoFemiNaZism and enragement that “models” and “WAGs” have invaded their “partners’ ” text-messaging, have moved on. This poor man had his entire eye taken out, and the fracture-zone passed into his brain.

Stiletto heels are good. At least, on short-girls, which is the right sort to be, they are.

They make the female stance and walk more exciting to watch, which is their primary courting purpose, and also they bring her secondary sexual characteristics up nearer to yours when you have got her in a hug. This is the next most important objective, and ideally leaves her still shorter still than you, which is necessary or else you would need to stand on a box, which means that your name is Bernie Ecclestone (and that would not be good.)

If she injured him in a taxi, then although we do not know the circumstances, I suggest one of the following:-

(1) He is “NSIT” *** which means he made a pass privately in the taxi, was rejected, and was rejected utterly and suddenly (unlikely that she would react so violently)

(2) She discovered he’d given his phone to a mate who sent pictures of him (taken earlier) to a call-girl, while pretending the pics were of the sender (possible these days)

(3) She read his credit-card-statements and decided to injure him about the massage-parlour-stuff on the way home after a date (likely)

(4) She was annoyed that he’d posted pics of himself on Facebook, with a former girlfriend on holiday in Ibiza the year before (very probable in today’s climate of opinion)

(5) She was annoyed that he’d not glassed-up a dude who looked at her in the pub (also sadly probable).

*** “not safe in taxis”

Very good and sound logic


David Davis

From David Farrer at Freedom and Whisky (.com)

And Freedom and Whisky finds more justification for leaving the State out of your arrangements.

Let’s just remind ourselves how the CHICAGO-GAULEITER won


David Davis

Sex was invented in 1963 – roughly when he was born -  in order to put him in power in 2008. 45 years is all it took, to bring down The City On The Hill (You idiots! Asleep! Isolationism! You let the GramscoFabiaNazis into your patch, when you might have got away with locking them out just on ours…):-

But at least human beings can bugger these FabioDroids up. Listen up, people: it matters to us in other nations who is the President of the USA. The right one, and we shall be all right – the wrong one, and we shall all fail including you:-

You people in North America clearly did not get it right in 2008.

I shall be writing, in the next few days, perhaps, or perhaps not, about why the next US President, and subsequent ones, should be chosen by the Executive Committee of the Libertarian Alliance, UK, London-Kent-Scotland-and-Lancashire, England.

Very interesting about “Tiger” Woods


David Davis

Do you know what? I can’t figure out why a man would want, in the modern world, to be called “Tiger”. I could not give such a male man a job, if he came to me at interview, and if I had a “firm”, for I would not know really how serious he was about work and life. Perhaps he ought to have thought about his PR-presentation before getting so rich and vulnerable. Perhaps “Fred” or “Robert” or “John” would have been a better name: it would indicate solidity, and the ability to get up in the morning and come to work.

If I was called “Tiger”, I could not marry any woman in the 21st century. Why? Because the GramscoFabiaNazis have deconstructed what female children (as humans, so they think they are) see in male children as humans (as they think they are), and have turned it into Celeb-mag-fodder.

Obviously, if you are called “Tiger” and you are then a complete failure at everything you do, before the age of 18 or so, then it’s a no-no for you to be an international sports droid…this just won’t wash. “And here’s TIGER! the Spurs goalie, and he’s just let in the 421st against his own side!!!!…and it’s only the 41st minute!!!!”… no, it won’t wash. Sorry. “Tigers” can’t be faiilures, or they’re dead.

So, why are 35,124,896 tarts all ganging up on one very (very very) rich man, all at one moment? isn’t it suspicious?

Are they pissed off about the money? (The most lovely sex of all can be for money, it is said, if you have the resources to have anything you want (like “Tiger” Woods), because you can dictate what you want and you can get it: we all know it in our hearts. Christians and other religionistas shoot the entire world in the foot by pretending otherwise, and much serious misery results as a result of this result, specially where GramscoFabiaNazis inspire impressionable young intelligent women to be “femin” ists.)Why did the Ottoman Emperors (and Mohammed, pbuh) have harems? For the good of their souls? Nah. Sex with plenty of women, for one man, as often as possble, is lovely. It’s what it’s for. That’s what the Y chromosome is for. That’s why so many, many of us are all here, today: it’s the great success story of the paleobiology of man.

Didn’t “Tiger” pay then enough at the time? Was that the problem? I think not. I thought these things were pre-agreed? And there’s too many of them anyway – he could not have short-changed them all: that would be crass and careless. And that part of the deal with expensive “escorts” (I’m sure all these women were expensive – they look it) was that, as an escort, you didn’t talk afterwards? What’s the point of these girls otherwise? If you didn’t talk for the sake of the sake of the Bilderbergers who have shagged you, and whom you would not want to expose for the sake of your own life at Copenhagen and after, then why would you “talk” about “Tiger” Woods? Money?

Does it matter if he had any or all of them at all, except to him and his wife, and if so, what is the MSM doing, getting involved at all? Is it any of their effing business?

Or is it that the world-global-governance has had “enough” of “Tiger” Woods, for some other quite unrelated reason?

Perhaps we are no better than the Incas: we set up someone to be an idol, for a year or a few, and then we tire of him, and we pull him down, into the  blood and dust.

I don’t give a f*** for golf. I don’t even understand the point of it. It is my privilege to be able to be like that and yet stay alive in the 21st century, when everyone goes for it. I even hosted an international Golf tournament slightly opposite my house, a year or so ago, for a mate, to show my astonishing magnanimity on this matter.

But I hate what I think is going on here. I don’t think a libertarian society would do this to people, over something that goes on in their private lives. It’s not even clear to me that he’s actually shagged all these women. if he did, so what? Is it anybody’s concern except of them, him and his wife? At least, if he did, he’d have got some pleasure out of it, in return for the delf-righteous preachings of his supposedly-aggrieved “sponsors”.

Or….is “Tiger” Woods a global warming skeptic…or even a _/denier/_ ???

Teh funneh


David Davis

I didn’t know that the Religious Worshippers, currently infesting Copenhagen, were as normal as that.

What is a government “sexual health policy”?


I didn’t mean really to write about this at all: I simply scanned the paper this evening, and this popped up. But the sub-heading about “sexual health policy” made me wet myself in hysterical laughter. If I did not think that what the British State is deliberately trying to do, to turn 70 million people into cretinoid uncritical enslaved barnyard animals, on purpose and via long-term strategic (and focussed) planning, I would think it was merely funny…….

David Davis

If the Government owns our bodies, then it can dictate a “policy” about how our bodies go about interacting with other bodies. If it does not, then it can not. It has only to come clean about what it intends.

A “sexual Health policy” smells strongly of things that Baldur von Schirach, or Stalin, or Mao or the dead Kim Jong-Il, or one of those other Nazis whose names I can’t presently recall such as that funny woman here somewhere in the 1900s, would have instituted.

I am a former Anglican through parental force-majeure when younger ["Does the school offer confirmation? Let him be confirmed!"], and in 2001 I decided simply to Walk To Rome one sunny Sunday in a Catholic Church (no “instruction” was needed here. I just walked.

You see, our problem- and our Burden -  is that Libertarianism Means Never Having To Say You’ve Lost Your Moral Compass (because you haven’t)…you ALWAYS know where you are going, and it enrages “ordinary people” with an intensity not to be contemplated – which is why most libertarians will be murdered one day…  Being moreover a molecular biophysicist, I am not sure I approve of abortions for convenience’s sake. They smack to me strongly of a Feminazi way of undermining “men”, as one tactic for reverse-engineering the fragile threads that hold Western Civilisation together.

The potential arrival of a small child, together with crying, sleepless nights, pooey nappies, the necessity of strange and hard-to-prepare-foods, the lack of intellectual/epistemological-conversation with it for at least six or more years, and the like, seems to me to be the potential cost of all this “free” sex which was invented by Kenneth Tynan in 1963. (Sex in this age and time is never free! Think about it…) Like crime, for which the only motivation is an individual decision to commit it, the most important motivation for the occurrence of sex is the decision of two people to have it now.

Stalinist governments interfering in individual human sexual relations simply project onto populations whatever the “government” thinks people should be doing in bed. If governments pay teachers of 6-year-olds in primary “schools” to tell the said 6-yr-olds how to “have safe sex”, and how “mutually-pleasurable” that is, then that is what they will try to do as soon as the boy can “get it up”. As the Wireless Tele Vision is so riveting, and cannot be missed, then abortions of human foetuses will therefore occur.

Yeh, that’ll stop the little buggers


David Davis

Telling them all about how lovely sex is, from the age of about 8, has not stopped them doing it as soon as the boys can get it up and the girls can slip it in, so that strategy has failed…so let’s just tell them even earlier, shall we!

I may be very obtuse, but I can’t see the logic in telling very very young children all about things to do with things which the same tellers ensure that they can’t consent to, for years and years. The difference between the ages of five and sixteen, seen from the viewpoint of an infant, is a stretch of geological time. I know, I remember.

These are things best left ot the families of the children, to sort out…ah, I forgot! The State now owns children, not families!

Whar goes around comes around, and we are now the Faraway Country of which the Czechs know little


David Davis

The Czechs have given in. (Who can blame them? Not I.)

BUT they have betrayed Britain!

Shame! We wuzz robbed! Klaus knuckles under! Munich! Death! War! But….

Poor guy, what can he do? We are not ultimately his problem. Like they were not ours, in 1938.

We will have to look to ourselves. AND I don’t care what Cameron says or pretends to say or not say, about “referenda” and on whay terms, or means or does not mean, for it is quite irrelevant. Nothing will change unless individual Tory politicians in power are forced at gunpoint to do so and to yield to majority opinion and gracefully accede.

We have all known this, for many many years, which is why all the thousands and thousands and thousands of  liberal blogs exist: we all pretend it is otherwise, but it is not.

In the early 1990s in the warm wet afterglow of Soviet-Imperialist dégringolade, I used to, while over there, tell my Czech and Slovak friends about the deceptive and only partially-visible undercurrents embedded in “the End of History”, and that “The Germans are Not Your Friends”. Happily I guess, they did not believe me for a moment about the Germans, for there are many German car factories in the Czech republic, employing thousands of Czech and Slovak workers, and turning out not Trabants but rather snazzy VWs rebadged as Skodas, and also a lot of Skodas. Rovers and MGs are now of course Chinese. This is probably for the best, and probably a good thing for us all, if all factors are taken into account. I also warned them about the post-Gorbachev-USSR, but that will be another future story, the end of which cannot yet be perceived.

In the meantime, a new threat to individual liberty and small-nation-self-determination has emerged. If you are here, you know all about it. It is called the EU. Now you must be told, if you are new here and also perhaps not a Subject of The Queen or even a citizen of the wider Anglosphere, that “the EU” was not what was originally being sold to us here. What was initially aggressively, and very, very, very submissively sold, as an “honest, Guv, this is a really really great train, you ought to be on it” thingy,  to the British was a “Free trade Area” or “Common Market” – we should have got our hackles up at that already but didn’t. We already could have had free trade but it was supressed by the GramscoStalnists in power in the UK  from 1945 to 1979. The Schumanno-Monnetia-Nazis thought we’d bite on “Market” and fail to notice the barbed tarantula-sting in the “Common” bit, and they were quite right. We were had.

It did help them of course, that in the decades involved we did have more or less perverted-GramscoFabiaNazi-collectivophile administrations: these saw the way things were blowing in Europe and the world, saw the nice food with olive oil and garlic and the lovely sexy girls and the warmer and drier and more predictable weather and the vineyards and the cheap sex, and jumped in, on our behalf but for them and not us. (Why else did upper-class women throw wine over Sit Ternece Conran at parties, as a punishment for selling glass Tuscan pasta-jars in Habitat for £3.99 so “everyone” could buy them?)

To the British Enemy-Class, the EU is about power, money, unaccountability for expenses, junkets to Bamberg (twinned with Bedford!), sex with expensive “escort girls” (and you can pass it through as “entertainment”, which it of course is) and “calling for harmonisation”. To British people who can afford it, the EU is about lovely, lovely, sexy food at “bistros” that we were “just passing”, not having to “change money”, sex with expensive British chavettas in Ibiza so you can chat them up while pissed, getting English beer in Benidorm, garlic to make everything taste of something, and being able to fly to Prague for “stag” “dos” for 99p return. Oh and “buying that really great farmhouse, to live off the land”….

All this of course is not what Europe was really about.  Not even Jean Monnet, the Great buroNazi, envisaged that it would be that easy to defeat the Real Enemy. We did that ourselves. Europe, as in the “EU” is about recreating a Reich.

That’s why you have to keep voting until you give the right answer….until the Terror-Police are here which means you are relieved of having to vote, for the choice is the right answer or else to be killed. They are a little late with the Terror-Police, but I am sure this is being worked on even today.

Poor Vaclav Klaus, noble and intelligent chap that he is, cannot help us now. It is even the fate of his people’s principal politicians who mattered to be like that. How ironic and sad can you get? So. Either our history as a nation, and as the foundry-crucible of libertarianism, comes to and end here, or else something is done. There is no long-term strategic problem, as the history of Russia and the USSR has shown, in denouncing and repudiating things laughingly called “treaties”. We should look as a nation to our own interests. If we are a libertarian nation, then we ought to look out for our own interests even more fiercely, since we shall find ourselves under open threat even from those whom we once called our friends – as I have always warned and will continue so to do. There is no founding libertarian doctrine that says a nation state, once it has discovered itself either again or anew, ought to observe treaties that are inimical to its survival and which have been made by its predecessors.

Even Westminster says that no Parliament can irrevocably bind its successors.

So, well, there you are.

Shall we just go, now?

Gosh


Michael Winning

So how many are they allowed? I wonder also, what becomes of the young men who statistically lose out? I mean if you get a load of wives, where does that leve someone like me who can’t even pick up a girl?

I suppose it approximates to a Free Market then?

wives1

Or just perhpas she does not fancy him


Michael Winning.

Mrs Obaba didn’t hug or kiss poor old Mr Berlusconi. Shame on her. Perhaps they don’t like him in the Enemy Class because he got to have all the girls before the real game was exposed. Perhpas my master will call a caption competion, i know he likes those, the prizes are fore what Obama is thinking….

No Silvio, you have enough of us already on your yacht!

No Silvio, you have enough of us already on your yacht!

Bet you 50p, that the NUS does _not_ have a “Men’s Officer”


UPDATE! I have worked out what is going on. It is a BBC/Enemy-Class project to destroy the University of Buckingham. To me, images of the fire in the Reichstag come to mind.

For foreign readers in free nations such as China, Buckingham University is the only UK University which is not funded by the State (not even partly, so there!)

David Davis

I may say more about this later, if I can think of something suitably humorous.

If memory serves me still, one Don, who taught me quite a bit, I think said once over a good High-Table dinner, “one isn’t supposed to f*** the women students, but it does go on a bit now and then”.

Here’s the original Times Higher Ed Supp article, so you can see exactly where and why Prof Kealey’s remarks were deliberately taken out of context.

I don’t usually comment on this sort of thing….


One sort of knows, in the background, that it goes on, but one is rather tired from striving to pay Gordon Brown and all that stuff….and Yemen and Afghanistan are rather far-away countries right now, of which we know little…

…but I even wondered about this picture for a LA caption competition – just look at the poor LITTLE girl’s face: this is her wedding photo, the poor mite – he’s “about 40″, and she’s eleven:-

David Davis

...you mean, I have to shag THAT?...

...you mean, I have to shag THAT?...

In my mind, there is no problem for a woman to marry an older man, in principle. I am 16 years older than my wife, and even the Director, Sean Gabb, married his dear and nice wife whom we know and love, when she was at the time about 12 or 13 years younger than he was. They have now caught up in age together, as you do, and as we have done. My wife is still 16 years younger than I am, but we are both now old warring scrag-bags together.

But I think for the wife to be “eleven”, as in the above picture, so it is said, is pushing at the boundaries of the envelope” a little bit, or even a lot. If this is what is going on, then I as a Libertarian who believes that individual humans have Natural Rights, believe this sort of process to be disgusting. If we believe that children are children up to a “certain age” (about which there can be some argument but broadly we all agree it is “about” 16 (or so) and therefore cannot consent legally to serious interpersonal arrangements or other sorts of contracts under that age, then that must be the case for all humans. It cannot be that our children here can’t do it, but Yemeni (or other) children can, for some spurious and quasi-religious or other pre-Renaissance pre-capitalist reason.

Ragged pre-capitalist, pre-classical-liberal, and barbarian-warlord-survival-guides, cleverly promoted and peddled as “religions”, and dealing with the disposal of debts, animals, defeated tribes, the enemy’s widows-of-beheaded-warriors, and his relict children, his men’s and boy’s severed heads, and his slaves and concubines, are no help to these poor children in the photo. Not at all.

Libertarians, when they will have regained The West (a long job, Boyo!) will have their foreign-policy-work cut out for some time. But perhaps not as long as against Lithuanian EU Commissioners who hate light bulbs.

This is the real, primary sort of Enemy-Class enemy that we ought to be “servicing”. We can then, having secured our civilisation, “service” people like that “Taliban” bloke who seems to be able to get lots of interesting and exciting weapons to attack our boys with. I can’t find a correct wikiref to “service”, which in the Cold War, meant “kill on the battlefield”. Sorry.

This here is very very funny and I do not know what to make of it at all..


so I guess our reader had better read it and see for (him her it)self.

David Davis

I know – I’ll now refer to the reader as “the readroid”…that will fix the anti-sex-GramscoFabiaNazis …  oh, I’ve twigged…they don’t want people to have sex, ‘coz it’s nice. Only for them, not for “us”. Droit-du-Seigneur and all that semi-mythical crap – is that what they are thinking?

So how-they-gonna-create-enough-slaveproles then? After the Endarkenment has been brought about, and with the re-standardised pre-capitalist infant death rates and all that, to which we will go back forwards?

Just a little piece of moral relativism that floated past the window of the submersible, as we travel down into the cesspool


I bet you all 8.2p that a Moslem girl, home educated, would not be forced into a “State” “school”. The GramscoStalinist Fabian free sex buggers would never think of even daring to ask. Now I do know that most Libertarians are either atheist or anti-religious, but this is an issue of individual freedom. I have already said today on a comment that we can’t go round killing all the members of the Enemy Class upon the event of our victory on day one, since that will degrade us to their level: we will have, sadly, to continue to allow them the means to prosecute their perverted science on purpose, upon others. So the war will continue, until one side or other gets serious about a result…..

David Davis

Here.

Court orders Christian child into government education

10-year-old’s ‘vigorous’ defense of her faith condemned by judge


Posted: August 28, 2009
12:35 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A 10-year-old homeschool girl described as “well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level” has been told by a New Hampshire court official to attend a government school because she was too “vigorous” in defense of her Christian faith.

The decision from Marital Master Michael Garner reasoned that the girl’s “vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view.”

The recommendation was approved by Judge Lucinda V. Sadler, but it is being challenged by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund, who said it was “a step too far” for any court.

The ADF confirmed today it has filed motions with the court seeking reconsideration of the order and a stay of the decision sending the 10-year-old student in government-run schools in Meredith, N.H.

(Story continues below)

The dispute arose as part of a modification of a parenting plan for the girl. The parents divorced in 1999 when she was a newborn, and the mother has homeschooled her daughter since first grade with texts that meet all state standards.

In addition to homeschooling, the girl attends supplemental public school classes and has also been involved in a variety of extra-curricular sports activities, the ADF reported.

But during the process of negotiating the terms of the plan, a guardian ad litem appointed to participate concluded the girl “appeared to reflect her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith” and that the girl’s interests “would be best served by exposure to a public school setting” and “different points of view at a time when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief … in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs.”

According to court documents, the guardian ad litem earlier had told the mother, “If I want her in public school, she’ll be in public school.”

The marital master hearing the case proposed the Christian girl be ordered into public school after considering “the impact of [her religious] beliefs on her interaction with others.”

“Parents have a fundamental right to make educational choices for their children. In this case specifically, the court is illegitimately altering a method of education that the court itself admits is working,” said ADF-allied attorney John Anthony Simmons of Hampton.

“The court is essentially saying that the evidence shows that, socially and academically, this girl is doing great, but her religious beliefs are a bit too sincerely held and must be sifted, tested by, and mixed among other worldviews. This is a step too far for any court to take.”

“The New Hampshire Supreme Court itself has specifically declared, ‘Home education is an enduring American tradition and right,’” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Mike Johnson. “There is clearly and without question no legitimate legal basis for the court’s decision, and we trust it will reconsider its conclusions.”

The case, handled in the Family Division of the Judicial Court for Belknap County in Laconia, involves Martin Kurowski and Brenda Kurowski (Voydatch), and their daughter.

The ADF also argued that the issue already was raised in 2006 and rejected by the court.

“Most urgent … is the issue of Amanda’s schooling as the school year has begun and Amanda is being impacted by the court’s decision daily,” the court filing requesting a stay said. “Serious state statutory and federal constitutional concerns are implicated by the court’s ruling and which need to be remedied without delay.

“It is not the proper role of the court to insist that Amanda be ‘exposed to different points of view’ if the primary residential parent has determined that it is in Amanda’s best interest not to be exposed to secular influences that would undermine Amanda’s faith, schooling, social development, etc. The court is not permitted to demonstrate hostility toward religion, and particularly the faith of Amanda and Mother, by removing Amanda from the home and thrusting her into an environment that the custodial parent deems detrimental to Amanda.”

“The order assumes that because Amanda has sincerely held Christian beliefs, there must be a problem that needs solving. It is a parent’s constitutionally protected right to train up their children in the religious beliefs that they hold. It is not up to the court to suggest that a 10-year-old should be ‘exposed’ to other religious views contrary to the faith traditions of her parents. Could it not be that this sharp 10-year-old ‘vigorously’ believes what she does because she knows it to be true? The court’s narrative suggests that 10-year-olds are too young to form opinions and that they are not yet allowed to have sincerely held Christian beliefs,” the ADF said.

“Absent any other clear and convincing evidence justifying the court’s decision, it would appear that the court has indeed taken sides with regard to the issue of religion and has preferred one religious view over another (or the absence of religion). This is impermissible,” the documents said.

The guardian ad litem had an anti-Christian bias, the documents said, telling the mother at one point she wouldn’t even look at homeschool curriculum.

“I don’t want to hear it. It’s all Christian based,” she said.

// Bookmark and Share

Obama, hear us! Find out what Ted Kennedy wants, and do exactly the opposite of what he asks


David Davis

When old GramscoFabiaNazis such as the “Kennedys” go to die, they are like elephants in a way, or worse: elephants are not known to repent in regard of their pasts sins, for we do not know if they understand the concept of Sin (the Bishop, when asked his opinion about sin, famously said: “I’m against it”) but at least elephants might not be considered essentially evil.

But “Ted” Kennedy (I honestly thought he’d been shot dead? – or was that all the others?) says he wants his dying wish to be an incubus on the American People. Well. That’s kind of like his grandfather.

Old Joe Kennedy, who used to try to shag his sons’ girlfriends, was against us in 1940. Of course you all remember: don’t deny it.

I may be “the babyboomer that the left lost”, being born in 1952, but I still can’t get this Kennedy thing. I will never figure out what the fascination with them was. The men didn’t even look like some object that a woman would like to be shagged by. Sacks of potatoes full of money, with penises attached to one end.

So what went on about them with all you Americans then? I’d just love to understand how and why you all got taken in by this bunch of shysters.

And as for the “Jackie” thingy -  (whatever her name was? Onassis, or was that afterwards?) A walking female skeleton+collagen-binders, wearing clothes and spending money at the same time? What  _were_  you thinking when you elected that? What did you think other nations would think of you and us? Deeply embarrassing and almost unexplainable. Bad. Fail.

Uranium, Tungsten, OIL, and young women of whom we have never heard…


…always have “amazing bodies”.

David Davis

As Auberon Waugh would have said: “I do not know”. But the Daily Mail always does.

The Daily Mail is about health scares and amazing bodies. I wonder why?

Please could somebody say who “Tess Daly” is? She can’t be a politician or I would have already heard of her. (I’ve looked up “Strictly Come Dancing”, to which she has some linkage, and I do understand what it is supposed to be, but what is the point of it?)

Perhaps, more importantly than presenting a dancing-prog, she works in MacDonald’s in a branch to which I have not been?

Oh! I know now! She’s a Wireless Tele Vision Cook! She does River Cottage!

She’s that neopastoralist old-Etonian pretending to be a woman, who bloody effing well ought to know better than proselytizing what he does on the telly!

Truly, the unbridgeable epistemological ravine -  between those who would like to say that there is no functional limit to the tonnages of Copper, Uranium, Tungsten and Chromium or OIL that can be mined, and those who watch Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and his amazing body after giving birth – is, er, epistemologically-unbridgeable.

At least there’s one MP human after all


David Davis

How does the bugger do it? Wish I’d had the secret years ago…

Boris Johnson hits out at EU regulation of London…what a surprise


David Davis

Now, look here Boris my old chum

You, as an honorary member of the Political-Enemy-Class (as you sadly are, be your heart ever yet so in the right place) have always, always known what the EU would wish to do to :-

(1) Any British industries and activities that competed directly with those of the Fourth Reich,

(2) Any others which didn’t directly, but which could give the UK any tactical advantage however small.

The first public revelation of this was when the buggers stole all our Fish, on the night that Traitor Ted signed the treaty of Rome –  he let them have it, “to overcome the last little diffculty”.

Boris, as you are reading this (I know you are, for you are at least 150% smarter than you look) you know you are currently the most powerful politician in London. you are indeed among the less-stupid politicians forcibly “bringing themselves closer to The People” today. (Poor, miserable people.)

__You__, Boris, have the power to cause London to do three things:-

(A) Secede from the UK

(B) Simultaneously withdraw London from the EU! It would happen constitutionally if you took London our of the UK anyway…

(C) Slash London taxation!

Your problems, and ours, are then over. London will become profitable again, as 100% of all EU-based financial service firms fall over themselves to relocate their head offices to it. Furthermore, you will be able to draw on the enlarged pool of (now even cheaper) labour available to London from the new-low-wage-economy of neighbouring England!

Think, just think! Think of all the English you could now easily afford to employ, at Polish wages! You’d slash English unemployment at one stroke, and Labour would never govern England again – you could FREE us! Hong Kong at the end of the M1!

You will instantly become the Hong Kong of the North Eastern Atlantic Greater-co-Prosperity-Sphere! (Which will instantly form up alongside you.

Whole valleys of Nanobot-factory-complexes in Cornwall and Brittany, anyone?

Libertarian Alliance Quote of the Day


David Davis

Brought to you by the tender ministrations of “Little Frigging in the Wold“….

“It begins, slowly rising out of the swamp like a lawyer at dawn. We clutch our poking sticks to our chests in trepidation as the vague shape stumbles out of the mists towards us. Then, as the features of this unknown beast resolve themselves out of the heavy mists hanging over the swamp…”

Read the whole thing, it is teh funneh (as Obnoxio would say.)

Golly, that’s a relief then…


David Davis

The real breaking news that you’ve all been waiting for, for most of this year, is that Canterbury is “sufficiently gay”. Truly – Obama was Breathless in Boise, Idaho: Ahmadinejahd was apprehensive in Isfahan (Asfahan? Nah…doesn’t cut it) wondering who to hang next, Kevin Rudd was kuddling his Rolodex in Kookaburra…wondering when the call would come in….

Libertarians, if honest (and mostly we are) have no interest whatever in the sexual orientations of individuals with whom we don’t associate in sexual ways ourselves. If one’s body is one’s own property, as it must be – except in the eyes of GramscoFabiaNazis who wish to shape its destiny perforce – then what one does with it and with whom is a private matter entirely.

I would not have thought this needed re-stating, but Canterbury Soviet think otherwise.

The LGBT “communities” (or whatever word is used for them these days in PC circles) really really ought to  __fear__  the triumph of what we call The Enemy Class. They ought to remark on what happened to homosexuals in places like the Third Reich, Stalin’s USSR, Cuba, many many dark places in Africa post-Bandung, and elsewhere such as “Islamic” countries.

They really ought to want people like the LPUK to triumph in elections instead.

Boris Johnson Ian Clement London expenses mistresses Labour Stalinists, spin liberty Ken Livingstone human resources


David Davis

Simple!

Boris Johnson should simply blame the whole affair on GramscoFabiaNazi Stalinsist scumbags such as Ken Livingstone, who clearly put the “London Mayor office expenses scheme” in place. So that scumbags could entertain their mistresses (cor! I’d like a mistress!) on the taxpayer.

After all, if you are a GramscoFabiaNazi, that’s what the taxpayer is for: he/she/it is a “resource”. For you. Foy you “represent” him/her/it.

So you need dosh.

After all, Boris can’t have done this, can he, he can’t have made the system. He wasn’t in office then.

Remember how to blame everything that goes pear-shaped in the NHS or “schools’n’hospitals” on  __TORY CUTS__ ?? Well, we have some  __Labour_sluts__  … we can blame expenditure increases on them.

It’s really high-time that the Enemy Class learned how to use public money to procure lovely sex, as Tories have known how do do for centuries (although it was mostly their own money) rather than just to have their hands in the till (and just take money, that’s boring, man) in a low, gauche, socialist way.

I mean, if you’re going to take the people’s money and piss it up the wall, then at least do something glorious and creative with it, like spending it on great sex….

…..show some elementary respect for the producers of that bloody money!

Otherwise, they will simply garotte you one day – as opposed just to slicing off your head rather quickly, with a rusty breadknife.

I mean, all that this episode tell Boris Johnson is:-

GET RID OF THE DEPUTY MAYOR – HE IS A STALINIST PLANT TO GET YOU IN TROUBLE!

Have none!

Be serious.

Simply annouce that all “deputy mayors” will be executed by Firing Squad, at their own front doors, upon the morning of their appointment.

Can you name this man?


David Davis

Noce dress hes got on

Nice dress he's got on

d.arnott

(Stuck that in ‘coz I thought the other link had been deleted.)

I could not until The Devil tipped us off. That’s not a woman, pull the other one, it’s a man who works in the public sector, and he’s wearing a blouse or 1950s dress which he got out of a charity shop while nobody was looking, and his hair’s a bit long and he’s not brushed it for a couple of days (so it must be a man then.)

Why is it that so many, many people who work for totalitarian organisations, (such as ASH) look like the oily undersides of gearboxes? Could it be the result of not getting enough sex? I do not know.

New inside look at OCR ICT education…….. …..First hand experience!


Peter Davis

I did this last year at my school, and you could just tell that this task was thought up by the government.  May I point out that the task was to create a video in Windows Movie Maker about recycling.

I think that, well yes, its fair enough that we have to make a video, as we would learn the skills to be able to do it…..But do we have to do it on ‘Recycling’?

Anyway, this was my submission for OCR nationals Unit 23. It got a very high mark, and it took me 20 minutes. I hope you enjoy it … or maybe not.

Yes, you saw it: this is what your children do in year-9 at secondary school it the UK (for foreign readers, this is 13/14 year-olds.)

Blogeditor says:-

Something to do with this stuff would have been more fun…

(…but most of the poor buggers don’t even know what these things are, let alone that they might have even existed.)

The Labour government is coming apart at the seams. Should libertarians care at all?


David Davis

I can’t really summon up much self-hysteria for this matter.

It’s like when the Berlin Wall fell while being videoed on live Wireless Tele Vision, in November 1989.

I sat there*** rocking back and forth, and silently crying, on the sofa-that-is-long-junked, and then I staggered up to bed with my (then) live-in-girlfriend, and we slept the sleep of the unconscious together – no sex that night. Or like the Cavalry-Major who witnessed the Armistice in 1918, and said what an anti-climax it was, as his squadron’s bicycles could not keep up with the retreating Germans.

***I saw it put up, and prophesied in 1987 that it would fall down “soon”, (and got sacked from my employer for my pains – although to be fair my beliefs on this one formed part of a generally-disliked-pattern of liberalism – my then-employers thought with deep sincerity that they were “communications management” “consultants“) and then I saw it fall down.

The fall of this lot here in Westmonster is trivial in the extreme, when compared with those events 20-odd years ago.

…And…for the ScumbaGramciaNazi Grand Challenge Cup (all comers) we have this…


David Davis

He claimed £5 for money he put in a Church Collection. Has to be Labour of course. Even the Tories would not do that.

Frank Cook. Hmmmm. Does not think people should have guns…unsound a priori.

This is a sort of roundup

…I wonder what other countries think of us these days.

But it will get lost, in the media-furore against the Tory claimers….true that their claims have been bizarre and astonishingly ill-judged against the possibility that they might all come out, but I think the general principle holds still, that GramscoMarxiaNazis still have their hands more firmly rooted inside the back recesses of the till than Tories do, or have done. Tory MP-scammism was, rightly and originally, about getting lovely sex with younger women, who posed as “parliamentary secretaries”, since young Tories all wore pinstriped suits, Bengal Shirts and silk ties all the time, and were estate agents and could not therefore pull girls. But in default of being able to do that, what was needed could be called in anyway just over the phone if you were an MP: I don’t know why they could not have stuck to the model (in a manner of speaking.)

No averagely-pretty young woman would, I feel sure, agree to be shagged by a socialist in any case, and assuredly not even for ready money or expenses. the current appearance of “Blair Babes” corroborates this hypothesis.

I can’t think people like Keeley Hazell and all her clones would be so base.

The Miliplanter and pot plants: what a business, eh? And a rant about leftyism and surly (I meant to type curly)-headed black-haired actors in Georgian jackets…and that’s just the men.


David Davis

First people query your expenses, which you have taken so much trouble to get to be defined as “within the rules”, and then you die.

POT PLANTS…. Jesus H Christ, you really just  __have to__  laugh at these people. The Miliplanter is clearly not serious at all.

It’s a tremendously fun hoot actually – I mean, just look at this prize piece:-

ur files also how Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, over-claimed for both his council tax and mortgage bills.

Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, is revealed to have changed his official “second home” designation four times in four years.Meanwhile, the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, spent so much on pot plants at his constituency home that his gardener questioned whether they were necessary “given [the] relatively short time you’ll be here”.

Meanwhile, as we say ‘ere, ” ‘yer-av-ta-luff”. (Also, “Icelandtalks” seems to have linked to us, somehow, I can’t tell how..but… Hi there, welcome to Gordon Brown’s world of terrorist banks. eh?)

See our earlier today piece about socialists and trough-pigging. I mean, if They-Stalinists would just stick to sex, I would not mind so much. The problem of today is that they try to shyste so much money. Money costs. Sex is free.

Sex is actually quite nice, and nobody gets killed (see Pol Pot) as any self-respecting proper Tory Toff will be able to tell these jumped-up-University-lecturers. You go out, you call in one of the cow-girl-daughters of one of your more taciturn and upright Yeoman-retainers – mind that you choose the one with pretty boobs and hips so it’s quick for you and her and nicer for you (make sure __also__ that she’s the one that won “Miss Best Bum” at the last “harvest-maid-fete”) – you shag her in the 6th upstairs-bathroom while the Lady of the Manor is instructing the Servants Below Stairs on flower-arranging, and you then just tell her to go back to her duties. Quite simple, she’s all right, you’re all right. If she has the brass-neck to produce a child, then you get it “avowed” by one of the young men who live in one of the hovels near hers, and you’re sorted. No money needs to change hands.

Expenses problem solved: there aren’t any.

Socialism, eat your heart out, you never got a system like that did you.

But Karl Marx f*****d his wife’s maid, and their son worked for the Great Northern Railway, blamelessly for many years. Michael Caine says not a lot of people know that.

Perhaps the dude Marx was a Conservative after all.

LEFTIES! D’you really think we live like that? No, I thought not. Then stop the BBC doing those awfully naff Thomas Hardy-type costume-dramas, and selling the twattish rubbish round the planet to traduce us.

Gosh it’s friday


David Davis

This is fun though.

If we just bit the bullet, sacked Polly Toynbee and sent her a single ticket to Tuscany, closed The Guardian, and shut down 44,908 quangos, then British teenagers could still drink all the alcohol they need and which would then cost the poor bastards less, and we could have 61 more unclear submarines.


David Davis

I did mean to type “nuclear”, but an unclear sumbarine does seem rather useful.

So he’s not going to resign, then.


Vlad the Informer

No of course not, there’d have to be a by-election…..it seems ZanuLieborg have discovered how to behave like old Tories.

ZanuLieBorg Feminazis are sooooo obsessed with sex that ……


they think this. I must admit, I was a shocked on reading it as you clearly are right now. They must be Gramsco-Fabians after all. Pity.

It sort of doesn’t chime right….why should a brave new world prole, having been brought up on a compulsory primary-school diet of sexualisation packaged as “sex education”, ever  _need_   _yet one more_  orgasm, at the moment of giving birth, when her primary-school-teachers have taught her how to have, nay to demand one, every time she is shagged (with a condom of course, so hard cheese on the poor fella for net getting one himself.) 

Hat tip Mummylonglegs. I think this is the original infolink.

I blame the Fabians, and Telly, for this: also beards, Islam, the Police, and manufactured Gramsco-Fabian racist incidents


…..for this.

David Davis

And this. It is a grand beard and he should be pleased that we notice it. The bugger must have grown the thing on purpose, it can’t have got onto his face by accident. And it knocks Karl Marx into a cocked hat. Much much better. Good stuff, wish I’d had the patence and the limitless budget for shampoo.

But if I was his wife, and I still was of the age where I had to be shagged by him, then he would either have to cut it off entirely (beards and hominid sex do NOT go together, no , not) or I would leave him: the alternatives would be repellent.

The English people notice noticeable stuff about their friends by lampooning them. that is how surnames evolved. The sooner this bugger learns that, and fits in, humouresquely and psychologically, the better he will get on with us here, and the more pints we shall buy him in the pub.

Of course, if he’s been specifically put in, to the Police or anywhere else, as  Gramsco-Fabian plant, by the Gramsco Fabians or their even fouler and even less-cultured friends the Gramsco-Marxians in Universities (most of which will just have to go) to create an institutnioally-racist-incident, or whatever the bastards and other embedded socialist psychopaths among us call this stuff now, then the situation is different.

Then, I would say that he is deemed to be part of the enemy personnel but wearing Allied Uniform. He is a “plant”, and then knows what risks he runs. See “Battle of the Bulge” and “Skorzeny”, on Wikipedia. See what happened to poor Germans captured in US uniforms behind the lines (we are _ALL_ behind the lines, in today’s Gramsco-Fabian Britain: that is what gives it the potential tone of a coming Civil War.)

This poor, and probably used, man should very very quickly find out who his real friends are (please could he google http://www.libertarian.co.uk and http://www.lpuk.org … now please! ) and stop allowing himself to be used as a pawn by the evil and wicked British-Gramsco-Fabians, before it’s too late to save him and his innocent family.


Interesting blog


Here. 

David Davis

It ain’t funny, we got no money…


Peter Davis

funny…

Sean Gabb: Speech to Conservative Future


Groan:- I don’t know what that smiley is doing there, but I can’t remove it. It’s none of my doing.

UPDATE3:-Please read this response-post, and _in particular_ the comment posted thereupon by an informed member of the blogateriat.

UPDATE2:- Here’s Sean Gabb’s thoughts earlier this year on holocaust denial, a hot subject.

Earlier comment from Blogmaster just after main post filed:-

(1) A direct link from the young Conservatives, who were kind enough to report the event charitably, is here.

(2)  This post by Sean is not for the faint-hearted: that is to say, those who may quail when the real assaults finally come. The prognosis for liberty in the UK is not currently good, and may not get better.

I have just read this on another forum, and would have published it unilaterally had not Sean Gabb done so already. You will find, on reading down, that the floor-response to Sean’s address was not as positive as a rational person would have hoped from today’s Tories, in Britain, embattled as they seem not to realise – or else prefer not to know, and pretend that all will be well if only they take power.

I think we can expect that, on ZanuNewLieborg being thrown out, as they will be, but not decisively (as we fear) then the British Conservative Party will remain a less certain but still definite enemy of individual liberty. this was not always the case as Sean points out. But it is now.

Free Life Commentary,
A Personal View from
The Director of the Libertarian Alliance
Issue Number 181
16th February 2009
Linking url: http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc181.htm

Text of a Speech to Conservative Future,
Given in The Old Star Public House, Westminster,
Monday the 16th February 2009
by Sean Gabb

I’d like to begin by praising your courage in having me here tonight to speak to you. I am the Director of an organisation that tried hard during the 1980s to take over the youth movement of the Conservative Party. The Libertarian Alliance provided a home and other support for Marc-Henri Glendenning, David Hoile and Douglas Smith, among others, when it looked as if libertarians might do the same to the Conservative Party as the Trotskyites nearly did to the Labour Party. Sadly, our efforts failed. Since then, the Conservative Party has become more watchful of people like us. It has also, I must say, made itself progressively less worth trying to take over.

I did say that I would come here and be rude to you. But that would be a poor thanks for your hospitality. Besides, while your party leadership has consistently ignored my advice during the past twelve years – and has, in consequence, been out of office during this time – there is no point in dwelling on what might have been. We are where we are, and I think it would be useful for me very briefly to outline my advice to a future Conservative Government.

Now, this is not advice to the Government that looks set to be formed within the next year or so my David Cameron. I may be wrong. It is possible that Mr Cameron is a much cleverer and more Machiavellian man that I have ever thought him, and that he plans to make radical changes once in office. But I do not think he is. I think what little he is promising to do is the very most that he will do. In any event, he is doing nothing to acquire the mandate without which radical change would lack legitimacy. And so this is advice that I offer to some future government of conservatives, rather than to any prospective Conservative Government. It may even be a government formed by the people in this room.

My first piece of advice is to understand the nature of your enemy. If you come into government, you will be in at least the same position as Ramsay MacDonald, when he formed the first Labour Government in the 1920s. He faced an Establishment that was broadly conservative. The administration, the media, the universities, big business – all were hostile to what it was believed he wanted to do. The first Labour Governments were in office, but not fully in power, as they were not accepted by the people with whom and through whom they had to rule the country. To a lesser degree, Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson faced the same constraints. A future Conservative Government will find much the same.

Over the past few generations, a new Establishment or ruling class has emerged in this country. It is a loose coalition of politicians, bureaucrats, educators, media people and associated business interests. These are people who derive income and status from an enlarged and activist state. They have been turning this country into a soft-totalitarian police state. They are not always friendly to a Labour Government. But their natural political home is the Labour Party. They will accept a Conservative Government on sufferance – but only so long as it works within a system that robs ordinary people of their wealth and their freedom. They will never consent to what should be the Conservative strategy of bringing about an irreversible transfer of power from the State back into the hands or ordinary people.

A Cameron Government, as I have said, seems willing to try coexistence with the Establishment. The Thatcher Government set out to fight and defeat an earlier and less confident version of the Establishment – but only on those fronts where its policies were most resisted. It won numerous battles, but, we can now see, it lost the war. For example, I well remember the battle over abolition of the Greater London Council. This appeared at the time a success. But I am not aware of one bureaucrat who lost his job at the GLC who was not at once re-employed by one of the London Boroughs or by some other agency of the State. And we know that Ken Livingstone was eventually restored to power in London.

If you want to win the battle for this country, you need to take advice from the Marxists. These are people whose ends were evil where not impossible. But they were experts in the means to their ends. They knew more than we have ever thought about the seizure and retention of power. I therefore say this to you. If you ever do come to power, and if you want to bring about the irreversible transfer of power to ordinary people, you should take to heart what Marx said in 1871, after the failure of the Paris Commune: �the next attempt of the French Revolution will be no longer, as before, to transfer the bureaucratic-military machine from one hand to another, but to smash it, and this is the precondition for every real people�s revolution�.�

The meaning of this is that you should not try to work with the Establishment. You should not try to jolly it along. You should not try fighting it on narrow fronts. You must regard it as the enemy, and you must smash it.

On the first day of your government, you should close down the BBC. You should take it off air. You should disclaim its copyrights. You should throw all its staff into the street. You should not try to privatise the BBC. This would simply be to transfer the voice of your enemy from the public to the private sector, where it might be more effective in its opposition. You must shut it down – and shut it down at once. You should do the same with much of the administration. The Foreign Office, much of the Home Office, the Commission for Racial Equality, anything to do with health and safety and planning and child protection – I mean much of the public sector – these should be shut down. If at the end of your first month in power, you have not shut down half of the State, you are failing. If you have shut down half the State, you have made a step in the right direction, and are ready for still further cuts.

Let me emphasise that the purpose of these cuts would not be to save money for the taxpayers or lift an immense weight of bureaucracy from their backs – though they would do this. The purpose is to destroy the Establishment before it can destroy you. You must tear up the web of power and personal connections that make these people effective as an opposition to radical change. If you do this, you will face no more clamour than if you moved slowly and half-heartedly. Again, I remember to campaign against the Thatcher “cuts”. There were no cuts, except in the rate of growth of state spending. You would never have thought this from the the torrent of protests that rolled in from the Establishment and its clients. And so my advice is to go ahead and make real cuts – and be prepared to set the police on anyone who dares riot against you.

I fail to see how you would face any electoral problems with this approach. Most Conservative voters would welcome tax cuts and a return to freedom. As for those who lost their jobs, they do not, nor ever will, vote Conservative.

Following from this, however, I advise you to leave large areas of the welfare state alone. It is regrettable, but most people in this country do like the idea of healthcare free at the point of use, and of free education, and of pensions and unemployment benefit. These must go in the long term. But they must be retained in the short term to maintain electoral support. Their cost and methods of provision should be examined. But cutting welfare provision would be politically unwise in the early days of our revolution.

I have already spoken longer than I intended. But one more point is worth making. This is that we need to look again at our constitutional arrangements. The British Constitution has always been a fancy dress ball at which ordinary people were not really welcome, but which served to protect the life, liberty and property of ordinary people. Some parts of this fancy dress ball continue, but they no longer serve their old purpose. They are a fig leaf for an increasingly grim administrative despotism. I was, until recently, a committed monarchist. I now have to admit that the Queen has spent the past half century breaking her Coronation Oath at every opportunity. The only documents she has ever seemed reluctant to sign are personal cheques. Conservatives need to remember that our tradition extends not only through Edmund Burke to the Cavaliers, but also through Tom Paine to Oliver Cromwell. We live in an age where it is necessary to be radical to be conservative.

But I have now spoken quite long enough, and I am sure you have much to say in response. I therefore thank you again for your indulgence in having invited me and the politeness with which you have heard me.

[A combination of silence and faint applause]

Comment 1: You accuse the Conservatives of having ignored you for twelve years. From what you have just said, it is a good thing you were ignored. Under David Cameron’s leadership, we have a Conservative Party that is now positively desired by the people. Your advice is and would have been a recipe for permanent opposition.

Response: I disagree. There is no positive desire for a Conservative Government. If there were, the polls would be showing a consistent fifty point lead or something. What we have is a Labour Government that is so dreadful that I have trouble thinking what could be worse.

[In a private conversation before my speech, I said that the Labour Party had turned out to be about as bad in government as the Green Party or the British National Party or Sinn Fein.]

There are two ways of doing politics. One is to listen to focus groups and opinion polls, and offer the people what they claim to want. The other is to stand up and tell them what they ought to want, and to keep arguing until the people agree that they want it, or until it is shown not to be worth wanting. I think I know what sort of politicians will run the next Conservative Government. What sort of politicians do you want to be?

Comment 2 [from an Irishman]: What you are saying means that the country would be without protection against obvious evils. With no child protection services, children would be abused and murdered. Without planning controls, the countryside would soon be covered with concrete. Without planning controls, cities like Manchester would be far less attractive places.

I will also say, as an Irishman, that I am offended by your reference to Oliver Cromwell, who was a murderer and tyrant. You cannot approve of this man.

Response: You have been taken in by the Establishment’s propaganda. This is to insist that we live with vast structures of oppression, or that we must accept the evils they are alleged to curb. I say that that these structures do not curb any evils, but instead create evils of their own. We have, for example, seventy thousand social workers in this country. They appear to have done a consistently rotten job at protecting the few children who need protecting. instead, they are taking children away from grandparents to give to strangers, and are setting the police onto dissenting ministers who allow their children to climb onto the roof. None of this should be surprising. The Children Act and other laws have created a bureaucratic sausage machine that must somehow be filled. I say let it be destroyed along with all else that is evil in our system of government.

[What I might have said, but was too polite to say: As for Oliver Cromwell, he was one of the greatest Englishmen who ever lived. It is partly thanks to him that we have just had around three centuries of freedom and political stability. When you refer to his actions in Ireland, you are repeating Fenian propaganda. What he did in Ireland has been exaggerated by the enemies of England, and in any event was in keeping with the customs of war universally admitted in his own time. If you want to throw an offended fit every time an Englishman in London praises an English hero to other Englishmen, you should consider moving to Dublin where all the letter boxes have been painted a reassuring green, and your own national sensitivities never need be offended again.]

Comment 3: All you speak about is winning and the destruction of enemies. Yet you are willing to consider keeping the welfare state. You are nothing but an unprincipled trouble maker. Thank God the Conservative Party no longer has any place for people like you.

Response: If we were facing the sort of Labour Government we had under Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson, you would be right. However, we have an Establishment that has already given us the beginnings of a totalitarian police state. Today, for example, the authorities will start collecting details of every telephone call, text and e-mail sent in this country. Children are about to have their details stuffed into a giant database that will enable them to be monitored by the authorities until they are adults – and probably through their entire lives. We live in a country were privacy is being abolished. Speech is increasingly unfree. The police are out of control. Everything is getting rapidly worse, and it is easy to see the end state that is desired, or total control.

If a government of radical conservatives ever does take power, it will have one attempt at saving this country. That means radical and focussed actions from day one. Anything less than this, and it will fail. I am suggesting a revolution – but this is really a counter-revolution against what has already been proceeding for at least one generation. If we are to beat the heirs of Marx, we must learn from Marx himself.

Comment 4: You are wasting our time with all this radical preaching. People do not want to hear about how they are oppressed by the Establishment, and how this must be destroyed. What they want to hear is that taxes are too high, that the money is being wasted, and that there are ways to protect essential public services with lower taxes. That is why the Taxpayers’ Alliance has been so much more prominent than the Libertarian Alliance. We must have nothing to do with the ranting lunatics of the Libertarian Alliance.

Response: You may have a desire for electoral success that I do not share. But I am the better politician. All debate is perceived as taking place on a spectrum that has a centre and two extremes. If the Libertarian Alliance did not exist, the relevant spectrum would simply reconfigure itself with the Taxpayers’ Alliance at one extreme, and the centre would be still less attractive than it now is. Since most people consciously take centrist positions, it is in your interest – regardless of whether I am right – to say what I do. It makes you and your friends moderate in relation to me.

[At this point, some unfortunate woman began screeching that I was a fascist, and the debate came to an end.]

[I normally like to comment on these events once I have described them. I think, however, the above stands by itself.]

NB—Sean Gabb’s book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, can be downloaded for free from http://tinyurl.com/34e2o3

Thanks for spotting this….


…and so today, the British Open Grauniadista-tweaking-contest Grand Challenge Cup goes to The Landed Underclass….for finding this rather fine material. Stylistico-philosphically-speaking, I have my covert suspicions that Landed and Belfry may be the same man – just using two different pub disguises, but I’m keeping quiet about that one.

David Davis

And this is good stirring stuff. I’m not surprised that the “left” is eternally whingeing that there are few outstanding, fast-responding socialist blggers: the people they’d need are all writing for the enemy.

I never knew there could be such a thing as a banned Jewish TV ad


My 100-chimpanzee-typewriter-research stenographic staff in the video-scanning-Nissen-Hut just went on idly, and this turned up. How extraordinary for a concept…I think it’s very sensual anyway, so there:-

What a delicious, pretty girl: I shall naturally acquire four of those at least (for Mohammed [peace be upon him] has said it’s all right if I can “support them” (pun.) He trumps Jesus Christ (being 600-odd-years more modern) who would have taken an alternative, possibly more reactionary  – dare I say conservative? – view. Of course M had more than four, and also probably many, many captured and forcibly-widowed Jewesses too (He said that was OK also, He really did, I’m just quoting Him.) Moreover, I have noticed that He [peace be upon him] says Jews are “dhimmis”, so of course then I can do anything I want with them: women-dhimmis of course will have even more “modified” status than ordinary ones.

I am sure that the “Jo Brand” thingytroid, whatever such a Marxi-Gramscomachine may be in reality (I have to say I had really never, never, heard of her at all before the last few days) will agree. This is ‘coz since Mohammed is not somebody to whom we should in any circumstances “send the poo” (not my words, Jo Brand’s!), as of course naturally he [Peace be upon Him] is not a member of the BNP, and is therefore entirely non-racist.

Pity that the pretty advert-girl’s ears (not the JoBrand-machine’s) are too small and flat for her profile. I said “ears”. I really did.

Just some Saturday night nonsense.

And a Spitfire to round off:-

633 Squadron Mosquito Deathstar attack spoof:-

Ahhhhh… climate change truly is irreversible…..


….so we have to act even faster to reverse it….

Er…ummmm?

David Davis

Keeley Hazell doesn’t want you to get burgled, so buy an i-Pod with a gun attached…..


David Davis

So that you can shoot straight, it seems you need an i-Pod now:-

Here she is, I expect the gun fits between the boobs, without being observed quickly:-

khburglaryimage1

And, thanks to The Remittance Man, we have this, just in! When I grow up, I want to be like mommy:-


And here she is again….(update, someone on the interwebthingy seems to have removed the image from the link…)


Get it on…


Vlad the Impala

I am indebted to David Thompson for this (er) small matter:-

The fascination among Fabian fascists and other nazis for condoms – presumably to be commanded to be used by nasty low hoi-Polloi other then themselves -  has often troubled me. Libertarians are often confused with “libertines” – in fact my dear neighbour Dominic, a blameless port-drinking 40-something  husband and father-of-three with a university degree, often gets at me over this matter. He is saying that we ought to alter our name libertarian completely since it upsets what he calls right-thinking-people, and makes them think we are in favour of what he calls Free Love….he’s even a bit concerned about the free-market thingy, too.

And yet the promotion of the mass use of these little rubber machines seems to go hand in hand with socialism. VIZ:- Wehrmacht standing orders for Barbarossa were that they were specifically to be worn by the soldiers while shagging Polish and Russian girls: and British Big-State secondary schools mandate it in PSHE lessons.

The phrase “family planning” sticks in mind, as used by the socialists. I should have thought that the only time you’d use a “durex” is when you are specifically _not_ planning a family…or have I missed something?

Harking back to University days, I do agree that condoms do actually decrease the risk of pregnancy. Here’s how it’s done. There was nothing more calculated to eliminate one’s libido than, at the ciritical moment with a young lady, she’d hop up naked out of the clinch, open her chest of drawers, and get out a…. Durex! You felt immmediately that, really, she was not for you – she clearly either had it planned, in which case “you” had been “for her” all evening and so she had just been acting in front of you: or else she did this sort of thing all the time, and therefore she plainly was not “for you” but “for anyone she had decided that fancied tonight at the student union disco”. The ability to “perform” was thus immediately severely limited, and almost none of these encounters was able to be pursued. Things didn’t improve even if you managed to get one of the blasted things on either: feeling nothing, you could do nothing, and had to fake it cleverly a second or two before you lost your erection, if you wanted to keep the girl.

I don’t really kow what’s the libertarian position (sorry) on condoms: who ought to use them, who ought not, that kind of thing – perhaps someone could “put me straight”? Would the Pope know? Perhaps we ought to ask Keeley Hazell. The blog editor does, so why not me?

Nah. They just go to more parties, where they are happy.


David Davis

“More pressure on teenagers to have sex at Christmas.”

I would have thought it was the obvious time. Midwinter: priests are haranguing people: you’re cold and tired: there’s a party: there’s free alcohol provided by someone else: and of course it’s when Jesus Christ was born. So there. Go to it teenagers.

In 1966, at Christmas, I first cuddled my first proper girlfriend properly, in a big armchair, in a darkened room, while the softer slower record was put on at the party, by the parents of the host, in the other room. I was 14, she was 13. My friends in the same room were the same age or not much older. We were all in the “Lower Sixth”.

Now THAT was what we called “sex”! (But it was before sex was invented on the Wireless Tele Vision.)

I still wonder about her even today.

Could I have some please!


David Davis

Viagra for Afghan warlords. Well, I never! I guess it makes sense as the stuff comes from India as £2 a pill or less, and probably cheaper over there as India is down the garden path.

But perhaps the CIA ought to think of its friends first, instead – as always – of its enemies? Perhpas it ought to be offering lots and lots and lots of it to ageing British and American Libertarians, so that we can beget lots and lots of Classical liberal children? After all, that’s what the enemy is doing isn’t it? (They pretend not to need Viagra, but perhaps the Man-Woman-Meme involved is different…in the West, the sheer physical effort involved, to make the woman “willing”, takies it out of you a bit. Nature intended hominid f***s to be really quick as is right and good, or you would get eaten by a giant-short-arsed-bear while your back was turned, literally.)

This is what you will get when you only let the Police and thugs have guns.


David Davis

This is what I believe is called a “Face Book page” or “Face Book group”. I have no clue what these things are at all, but I have looked at it, and it sort of looks like a blog I suppose. Thanks to The Remittance Man (who lives and works sufficiently far away from all this sordid stuff to be able to comment disinterestedly) for flagging up the business to do with poor Rhys Jones, of whom I guess by now that the world has heard. Not the sort of posthumous fame he would have wished for… What the world thinks of the socialistically-trashed city down the road I can’t dare to guess.

The Army’s got the right idea though.

Libertarians have been banging on, mostly unheard or ridiculed, for decades, about the need for all free people to have, and to be trained to use (by their fathers, which mostly they will have) guns. This sort of rubbish, of gun-toting unsocialised teenage gansters, would be moonshine in such a civilisation. They would last about five seconds.

The Saturday doo-bee-doo-Derby


I just love that sexy woman’s dancing bottom…but nobody seems to be feeling her up. Such a pity she’s a blonde, what a shame, even though she’s clearly having a gay time….What a bummer (as they say.)

Paedophiles: Paediatricians will have to be armed in the coming endarkenment. A nice story for Christmas.


Here you go, all you people.

It may very well be all right for everyone who feels like joining a pub-drinking-group to be free to attack, main and kill, without recourse to any audit, anybody who (may have been, or was, or was said to have been, somewhere, sometime, who cares when?) involved in child abuse. Or it may not. I do not know. People of course need outlaws, otherwise how can the rest of us know if we are “in”, eh?

In the coming endarkenment, it will be hard for an ordinary TV-watcher to distinguish between an average normal state-socialised-child-abuser and a Doctor who treats children’s diseases. This confusion will be deliberately enhanced, by the Wireless Tele Vision Channels, for the purpose of maximising readership I guess that’s what it’s called?) even though almost none of the poor buggers watching it can read…..

Personally speaking, I would not, being an English Mother (let me pretend to be one for a bit) dress 10- and 11-y-o English Girls in half-naked sleb-clothes, and then send them out to shop, in pairs or groups. A seriously stupid idea whic will only lead to more trouble.

English Coastal Corridor: is this for “ramblers” or for patrolling GUARDS?


David Davis

The government is proposing to nationalise the coastline. The Devil has the usual better details here.

This is ostensibly for the benefit of “ramblers” and other lefties. The idea of property rights and the private enjoyment of them does not seem to figure.

Personally, when it comes to running stuff like firms (or, dare I say it, States?) I do not really trust people who have nothing better to do all day than to stride aimlessly about in the open. Often, they are wearing coloured plastic clothes too, and are performing “walking-stick-theatre”.

They are very clearly under-employed: they should be at their desks working, or in their shops, stacking stock or ordering it, such as cigarettes (not shopping, that’s for other workers in their time off in the night) or in their cars on the road, selling to others.

At a pinch, they could be down in their mines, mining for things people want, like coal or Tungsten or Uranium. That’s not for the faint-hearted among them, I agree.

Now, I do appreciate that there is some point to the close-up enjoyment of beautiful outdoor spaces such as coastlines, mountain landscapes and so forth. I have done it myself, from time to time. But I do not feel the need to go forth and grab, statutorily, all of it at once, on a contingency-use basis, knowing that I personally will probably never take advantage of my land-grab.

No. These people are socialists: this is the sort who want voluntarily to regulate the lives of others to the supposed pace and tenor of their own, and then we often find that theirs bears no resemblence to their recommendation: just regard Polly Toynbee for instance.

I am not a fan of consproacy theories as you all know. But a 10-metre-wide “corridor” (with other prosthetic spaces attached periodically) smacks strongly of a guading-facility. You could get the following into it:-

(1) A razor-wire fence,

(2) Watch towers,

(3) Searchlights,

(4) Trip-wire-machine guns,

(5) Dog runs.

(6) at the expense of the dog runs and trip wires, you might even get a small anti-vehicle trench.

I leave you lot to think about it and draw conclusions.

And beer makes women beautiful.


What’s the betting that the government Beer-Nazi Soviet is going to get some fake-charity to ban beer ads next?

And  all you indolent bastards  out there might find this even a bit funny too:-

…oh, and good for the Okkers. Sod the veggies:-

And this is probably too comfortable to be an Udenopticon….